| Author | Thread |
|
|
09/05/2015 10:52:36 PM · #6576 |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Jim Robinson of the Free Republic said:
"The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians."
Is this true? |
Of course not ... |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:18:34 PM · #6577 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Jim Robinson of the Free Republic said:
"The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians."
Is this true? |
Of course not ... |
Really? What about Kim Davis?
|
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:26:48 PM · #6578 |
She's doing the thing so many people do: cherry-picking the parts of scripture to fit her pre-existing beliefs. Regardless, marriage is not exclusive to people that are practicing a religion. If she was a pastor, I assume she could rightfully refuse to marry certain people; but as a public employee in a country that separates church and state (allegedly), she's SOL.
I'm not an evangelical, but here's the perspective of one or more of them ...
Originally posted by Nullix:
Really? What about Kim Davis? |
Message edited by author 2015-09-08 13:27:34. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:29:12 PM · #6579 |
What about her? She has a job to do and she refuses to do it. She swore an oath to uphold the constitution and carry out the law and she refuses to do so. Apparently all of her assistants/deputies are able to carry out these duties without a problem -- I can't imagine that she would have filled her office with a crowd of atheists, so I'm guessing some of them are "Christians" too ...
She has a choice -- do her job as officially described or resign. It's not like there aren't other jobs she might have a religious objection to or be unqualified for as well. A state agricultural inspector who happened to be an orthodox Jew or Muslim, and who refused to carry out inspections of pork or pig farms for "religious reasons" would face the same choice.
I suppose there's one other (unpalatable) choice -- get the American Psychological Association to declare religious fundamentalism to be a form of delusional psychosis and demand "reasonable accommodation" under the ADA ... |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:33:39 PM · #6580 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Jim Robinson of the Free Republic said:
"The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians."
Is this true? |
Of course not ... |
Really? What about Kim Davis? |
That's bogus. Davis was not jailed for living according to her religious beliefs. In the real America, using your government job to violate the law, ram your beliefs down people̢۪s throats and deny people their rights is the actual First Amendment issue. If you can't apply the law equally to all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation, then you can't have a position that requires you to do so.
The ultra-conservative Christians want us to impose a form of Sharia Law based on what they perceive as Christian principles. So let's do it! And while we're at it, let's let our Muslim citizens use THEIR own, religiously-based laws instead of our secular laws, and let's have the Orthodox Jews do the same. Let's let EVERYONE affiliate themselves with some sort of minority and choose to abide only by their version of right living. And let's let them all duke it out for who shall prevail.
Heck, let's BE the Middle East, guys! Let's BE Africa! Don't y'all SEE the problems here? |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:40:26 PM · #6581 |
Originally posted by tate:
She's doing the thing so many people do: cherry-picking the parts of scripture to fit her pre-existing beliefs. Regardless, marriage is not exclusive to people that are practicing a religion. If she was a pastor, I assume she could rightfully refuse to marry certain people; but as a public employee in a country that separates church and state (allegedly), she's SOL.
I'm not an evangelical, but here's the perspective of one or more of them ... |
Here's the conclusion of Tate's linked article, an article BY a conservative Christian evangelist:
"It is easy to spin Kim Davis̢۪s story as one of persecution. It̢۪s easy to get on FOX News and warn pastors that this is what̢۪s coming for them if they refuse to perform same-sex marriage. But to do so would be dishonest. Because the reality is that Kim Davis is not being persecuted for her faith, she is reaping the consequences of refusing to do her job as an agent of the state. Davis is welcome to hold her beliefs as tightly as she would like, but when she is at work, she needs to do her job. If her job violates her conscience, then she should quit, because imposing her beliefs on the people of Rowan County is not an option. It̢۪s a violation of one of the highest and most sacred American values: Religious Liberty. And all those who seek to protect and defend American̢۪s rights to freely practice their faith without fear of government regulation should be standing firmly against Davis̢۪s actions."
Now, THAT'S someone talking sense.
Message edited by author 2015-09-08 13:41:47. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 01:44:15 PM · #6582 |
Be sure to make all the Biblical interpretations available for interpretation by public offiicials; especially Leviticus 20:10.
Message edited by author 2015-09-08 13:46:41. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 02:10:03 PM · #6583 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Jim Robinson of the Free Republic said:
"The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians."
Is this true? |
Of course not ... |
Really? What about Kim Davis? |
If a state official was Muslim and refused to issue licences (insert reason of your choice)would you be OK with that, or is it only Christians that need protection.
Ray |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 06:46:48 PM · #6584 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's bogus. Davis was not jailed for living according to her religious beliefs. In the real America, using your government job to violate the law, ram your beliefs down people̢۪s throats and deny people their rights is the actual First Amendment issue. If you can't apply the law equally to all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation, then you can't have a position that requires you to do so. |
Except, she's an elected official. When you have an election, I would imagine you vote for the person and their views.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The ultra-conservative Christians want us to impose a form of Sharia Law based on what they perceive as Christian principles. |
These aren't ultra-conservative Christian views. These are basic Christian views that have been in place for the past 2,000 years. It took 5 unelected officials to change public policy. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 07:05:00 PM · #6585 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's bogus. Davis was not jailed for living according to her religious beliefs. In the real America, using your government job to violate the law, ram your beliefs down people̢۪s throats and deny people their rights is the actual First Amendment issue. If you can't apply the law equally to all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation, then you can't have a position that requires you to do so. |
Except, she's an elected official. When you have an election, I would imagine you vote for the person and their views. |
The voters aren't allowed to violate the constitution either, no matter how big a majority.
If you get enough voters (and their representatives) to repeal the 14th Amendment guaranteeing that all citizens will be treated equally by their government then you might have a case ... |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 07:11:15 PM · #6586 |
The judge handled this perfectly.
he knew she'd get monetary support so he threw her in jail and instead of letting her fall on her own sword, he ordered her deputies to administer licenses and then let her out of jail and told her not to interfere.
Brilliant.
|
|
|
|
09/08/2015 09:15:55 PM · #6587 |
OK -- Ms. Davis is now saying that since she didn't give the deputy clerks "permission" all the licenses they've issued are now invalid.
Apparently she has no respect for the religious freedom of others, nor care for the ordinary emotional and financial distress she will inflict should she attempt to carry out this threat.
Of course, given the judge's conditions of release I suspect it would land her right back in her county-provided accommodations. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 09:34:58 PM · #6588 |
Sorry but WTFWJD? He'd let gays get married. Period.
Let God be the judge, not mere mortals.
When did Christians become SELF righteous? It's not our job to judge ...
What is the core fear here. Homophobia, I presume. Put down your crosses. Jesus didn't die to keep loving people from marrying .., pretty much the opposite . |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 11:14:58 PM · #6589 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's bogus. Davis was not jailed for living according to her religious beliefs. In the real America, using your government job to violate the law, ram your beliefs down people̢۪s throats and deny people their rights is the actual First Amendment issue. If you can't apply the law equally to all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation, then you can't have a position that requires you to do so. |
Except, she's an elected official. When you have an election, I would imagine you vote for the person and their views. |
Elected officials represent the entire citizenry of their position's reach, not just the people who've voted for them. It's ridiculous to even have to type that out.
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The ultra-conservative Christians want us to impose a form of Sharia Law based on what they perceive as Christian principles. |
These aren't ultra-conservative Christian views. These are basic Christian views that have been in place for the past 2,000 years. It took 5 unelected officials to change public policy. |
So Kentucky was against same sex marriage 2,000 years ago? You're blending a nasty spirituality and nationalism cocktail.
Regardless, Kim Davis is a bit of funny news. What isn't funny is that potential presidential candidates are aligning themselves with her. If the absurdity of Trump wasn't enough, we now have (hopeful) presidential candidates that feel comfortable going on record that their religious beliefs are more important than federal law. How the hell do you apply for a job that you admit you have no intention of honoring?
I thought Sarah Palin was the low point. |
|
|
|
09/08/2015 11:54:21 PM · #6590 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
That's bogus. Davis was not jailed for living according to her religious beliefs. In the real America, using your government job to violate the law, ram your beliefs down people̢۪s throats and deny people their rights is the actual First Amendment issue. If you can't apply the law equally to all citizens, regardless of race, creed, or sexual orientation, then you can't have a position that requires you to do so. |
Except, she's an elected official. When you have an election, I would imagine you vote for the person and their views.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
The ultra-conservative Christians want us to impose a form of Sharia Law based on what they perceive as Christian principles. |
These aren't ultra-conservative Christian views. These are basic Christian views that have been in place for the past 2,000 years. It took 5 unelected officials to change public policy. |
To the first: When you're ELECTED, you're sworn to uphold the Constitution, not the beliefs of those who elected you.
To the second: The ultra-conservative part is the desire to impose a Christian form of Sharia Law on the diverse populace of the state. Of COURSE these principles existed 2,000 years ago. There's nothing particularly "conservative" or "liberal" about believing them. But when an elected official chooses to ignore Federal law because she doesn't "believe" in it, she's imposing her religious beliefs on others. She has no right to do that. Her only honorable course of action is to stand down from her position and be a private citizen again. |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 09:26:41 AM · #6591 |
| Maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to tell others how they should live their lives? |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 11:02:14 AM · #6592 |
Originally posted by RayEthier:
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Jim Robinson of the Free Republic said:
"The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians."
Is this true? |
Of course not ... |
Really? What about Kim Davis? |
If a state official was Muslim and refused to issue licences (insert reason of your choice)would you be OK with that, or is it only Christians that need protection.
Ray |
Personally, I am against anyone getting a religious exemption in the workplace. I just the law about religious exemptions and totally disagree with it. If you can't or won't do the job, it's not fair to the other employees that have to cover for you. Do the entire job you are hired to do, in the manner you are hired to do it, or find different employment. |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 12:36:08 PM · #6593 |
As a Kentuckian, it seems we're too often having to duck our heads in embarrassment over peeps like Kim Davis. Ignorance, hypocrisy, lack of education, blah blah blah.
Religious fanatical fervor, though, isn't something you can Google for facts. It's about fear and indoctrination. It's about bowing to authority based on faith and "future", rather than a present reality and common sense. To the fundamentalist, it doesn't particularly matter what happens "here" because, like Muslims, Christian fundamentalists believe all the goodies are in the NEXT life. I wonder if they grok that particular irony.........
Anyway, what's far worse to me than Kim Davis, her goofy hubby, and her 15 minutes of humiliating Kentuckians is the fact that three very prominent Republican (aka conservative Christian) politicians, along with her lawyers, decided to exploit her. She doesn't care, of course, because she doesn't "get it"....or, may even welcome their taking the stage from her because it'll give her more chapters for her inevitable book deal, which someone else will write, but for which she will get credit, and big bucks. She may even get a movie deal!
I'm sure by now, everyone knows how Huckabee orchestrated the jail break with attendant publicity, Survivor music, and made sure everyone knew in advance he'd be there. Ted Cruz and Matt Bevin (the Republican candidate for KY Governor) were more or less forced away from the stage by Huckabee's goons. Pretty hilarious to a snickering liberal like myself.
So, poor Kim is a tool, being used as free fodder to bolster political campaigns. No doubt, like Joe the Plumber, she'll be running for higher office next year...and, she'd probably be able to beat Bevin hands down.
She's like a poodle in a dog show....groomed (hehe) and trained in order to benefit not HER, but her handlers. So, is there a war on Christianity? Of course not. There's a war on HER, and our system of government...that for which she works.
Christians, it's once again time for you to ask yourselves: WWJD? Certainly not what so many of YOU do. |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 01:44:45 PM · #6594 |
Originally posted by Mike:
Maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to tell others how they should live their lives? |
Yes please! Christians like Kim Davis are being told they need to ignore their consciences or go to jail. Of the hundreds of county clerks in the State of Kentucky, why target her? |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 01:57:41 PM · #6595 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Mike:
Maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to tell others how they should live their lives? |
Yes please! Christians like Kim Davis are being told they need to ignore their consciences or go to jail. Of the hundreds of county clerks in the State of Kentucky, why target her? |
i wonder how she would feel if someone refused to grant her any of her divorces because of their conscience.
|
|
|
|
09/09/2015 02:00:52 PM · #6596 |
Originally posted by Nullix:
Originally posted by Mike:
Maybe someone can explain to me why people feel the need to tell others how they should live their lives? |
Yes please! Christians like Kim Davis are being told they need to ignore their consciences or go to jail. Of the hundreds of county clerks in the State of Kentucky, why target her? |
She's not being told to ignore her conscience -- she's being told to do her job as she contracted (and swore an oath) to do or go to jail.
She's only being "targeted" because she's the only one who refuses to do her job ... oh, and because the ability to exploit her situation for political purposes is too tempting to pass up ... |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 03:42:41 PM · #6597 |
Nullix, I'm a little puzzled as to why this isn't black and white to you, too.....? Nobody cares what Kim Davis' beliefs are. But, taxpayers are paying her to do what she signed on to do. Issue marriage licenses. Period.
This is such a no-brainer, it makes one begin to wonder if you Kim Davis Defenders are simply making stuff up to give your politicians a platform to gather their base since they know they're gonna be creamed in 2016...? I mean, Huck practically SCREAMED politics on the stage with her yesterday.... |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 06:24:21 PM · #6598 |
Originally posted by Dave Ross:
What exact part of the Bible is she following?
I'm asking Kim Davis to help us out.
Davis is head clerk of Rowan County Kentucky. She is now out of jail for not issuing marriage licenses to gay couples. Her office is issuing the licenses anyway — despite her sincerely-held religious objections.
"I just want to give God the glory. His people have rallied and you are a strong people," she told a crowd that greeted her as she exited jail.
She is obviously sincere in believing that she is following God's law. And yet, she hasn't specified exactly which law that is.
If she's talking about the Old Testament passage declaring gay sex to be an abomination, that passage imposes the death penalty for the offense. But she let gay couples leave her office unharmed. So it can't be that law.
There is a New Testament passage that seems to apply. It's Romans, Chapter 13, and it says "Let everyone be subject to governing authorities. Whoever rebels against the authority is rebelling against what God has instituted, and those who do so will bring judgement on themselves."
It sounds like it's saying "Thou Shalt Obey the Supreme Court or else." By the way, that's the modern translation. The King James version is a little more ominous, stating "The palace that be are ordained of God, and they that resist shall receive to themselves damnation."
That sounds pretty serious.
The Bible seems to be on the side of obeying the higher earthly authority, and yet she isn't. Anyway, that's why it would be helpful to those of us trying to understand what God wants, if those of you who already know would just be a little more specific about how you know. Thank you. |
|
|
|
|
09/09/2015 06:51:42 PM · #6599 |
Originally posted by Luciemac:
Nullix, I'm a little puzzled as to why this isn't black and white to you, too.....? Nobody cares what Kim Davis' beliefs are. But, taxpayers are paying her to do what she signed on to do. Issue marriage licenses. Period.
This is such a no-brainer, it makes one begin to wonder if you Kim Davis Defenders are simply making stuff up to give your politicians a platform to gather their base since they know they're gonna be creamed in 2016...? I mean, Huck practically SCREAMED politics on the stage with her yesterday.... |
That office she holds is an elected office. She was an elected Christian to hold the office of County Clerk. If you voted in a Muslim, would you be surprised when they held to their Muslim beliefs?
(Why do you think the government can't just fire her for not doing her job? Because it's an elected position.)
Impeach or vote her out.
No, an agent of the state (the judge) has to impose it's views on individual Christians. Thus supporting:
Originally posted by Jim Robinson of the Free Republic:
The government has now officially declared war on Christianity and against individual Christians. |
To answer your question if it's true or not. Of course it's true.
Message edited by author 2015-09-09 18:55:13. |
|
|
|
09/09/2015 07:14:25 PM · #6600 |
As pointed out by Rebecca Hamilton:
"If an elected official does not perform their duties in a manner that the courts deem necessary, the courts have a certain latitude for redress, but this does not include summarily imprisoning the elected official. Perhaps the most clear-cut case of this in American history was when the Supreme Court ruled that the forced removal of the Cherokee Nation from their hereditary lands to Indian Territory (what is now the State of Oklahoma) was unconstitutional, and President Andrew Jackson ignored the Court.
Impeachment and the election process are how this nation has dealt with elected officials who do not perform their duties properly. When courts begin to imprison elected officials based on how they perform their duties, they are overstepping the separation powers which is one of the primary guarantors of our freedoms." |
|
